The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) says a new “user pays” funding model will take effect on July 1, with more transparent and simple fee calculations.

It will apply to all complaints closed after next month.

AFCA says the new approach means heavy users pay their fair share towards the service, while firms and industries which receive few or no complaints pay less. The new fee structure strikes the right balance between encouraging high-quality dispute resolution and avoiding disincentives to continue in AFCA’s process, it says.

“Our user-pays approach incentivises firms to use internal dispute resolution to decrease complaints to AFCA,” Chief Ombudsman and CEO David Locke said. “Our role isn’t just to resolve complaints escalated to us but also to play a preventative role.”

The new model includes a single annual registration fee of $375.55 for all financial firm members and $65.98 for authorised credit representative members. All members qualify for five free complaints a year.

AFCA has estimated 92% of its insurance members will experience reduced or unchanged total annual fees under the new model. The remaining 8% would see an increase, largely due to higher relative complaint volumes – compared with 14% in banking and 18% in superannuation.

It says 39% of insurance members will see a decrease in total annual fees, 52% will see no change and 89% will only pay the annual registration fee.

The change follows consultation between March 10-April 22 regarding an Independent Review by PwC in which the dispute resolution body accepted 14 recommendations related to its funding, technology, and its fairness jurisdiction project, to be addressed under a three-year program of work outlined on AFCA’s Independent Review page.

The new funding model is designed to minimise “cross-subsidisation” across sectors experienced under the old model put in place at AFCA’s inception in 2018, by considering both the volume of complaints for each firm and time taken to resolve them.

The 10% of overall users expected to pay more will do so because “this more accurately and fairly reflects their usage,” it says.

Feedback led to fee instalments allowed for payments above a set threshold, and the scrapping of a planned nominal $100 fee applied to complaints found to be outside AFCA’s jurisdiction - with a small increase to AFCA’s Case Management and Decision fees introduced instead.

AFCA also published a guide to how the user charge is calculated and removed the five free complaints in the previous year from that calculation as requested in feedback, while super funds have been brought under the same fee structure as other scheme members and a superannuation levy abolished.

Mr Locke says members welcomed the rewarding of good complaint resolution performance and apportioning fees fairly based on use.

“The feedback we received was overwhelmingly positive,” Mr Locke said. “Ultimately, firms have control over the fees they pay by taking a resolution mindset when managing complaints.”